Tushar Verma and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 1193 of 2026

¶3

Tushar Verma And Another

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 2 Others	Home Lko. And .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Abhishek Srivastava, Vivek Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s):	G.A., Vinay Kumar Verma

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.

¶9

Sri Amol Kumar, advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing vakalatnama on behalf of applicants and the same is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶11

The instant application has been filed with the prayer to quash impugned criminal proceedings of Case No. 35276/2026; styled as State Vs. Indresh Sharma @ Deepak & Anr. arises out of FIR No. 2/2026 U/s- 351(3), 109, 3(5) IPC lodged at Ps. Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow pending in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, VIIth, Lucknow against the petitioners on the basis of the compromise dated 06-03-2026 and release the petitioner forthwith in the interest of justice.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that under some misunderstanding, the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants and thereafter, the parties have amicably settled their dispute. The compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 06.03.2026, which has been annexed as annexure no. 8 to the instant application. He next added that now

¶13

NA528 No. 1193 of 2026

¶14

2

¶15

there is no grievance in between the parties with each other and the criminal proceedings against the applicants are the futile exercise as there is no fate of trial and that is amount to harassment of the applicants and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶16

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicants and submits that the parties have settled their dispute amicably through a compromise deed and there is no further grievance of the opposite parties against the present applicants and the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.

¶18

Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. This Court has gone through the injury report, wherein, it is apparent that the injuries are not on the vital part of the body of the injured. The case of the present applicants is covered with the ratio of judgments rendered in the cases of Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs State of Punjab & Ors. reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Kapil Gupta Vs State (NCT of Delhi) And Another reported in (2022) 15 SCC 44 and Naushey Ali And others Vs State of U.P. And Another reported in (2025) 4 SCC 78.

¶19

Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.

¶20

The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

¶21

NA528 No. 1193 of 2026

¶22

3

¶23

For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case No. 35276/2026 arising out of FIR No. 2/2026 U/s- 351(3), 109, 3(5) IPC lodged at Ps. Krishna Nagar, District Lucknow, shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.

¶24

The trial Court is directed to examine the fact that whether all the parties against whom the chargesheet was filed, the party in the compromise and in this respect, it shall also sent a report along with the verification order.

¶25

Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.

¶26

May 15, 2026

¶27

Mayank

¶28

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- MAYANK PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Tushar Verma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tushar Verma and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Santosh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Mohd.Yahya Alias Yahya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Shreyash @ Shreyansh Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. U.P. and Another

Vivek @ Vivek Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Aslam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vinay Kushwaha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another